Friday, February 27, 2015

I have valued my relationship with the British Museum over several decades. It has been a feature of my life for as long as I can remember.

I have read some of the material that has come out from Paul Barford's request for information. I hope that senior members of PAS will reflect on the way that staff have responded to awkward questions. Have they always reacted in a professional way? Could things have been handled differently?

It has been widely reported that significant archaeological material from Iraq has been deliberately destroyed. One of the reports can be found on the BBC with comments by Professor Eleanor Robson of UCL ("Islamic State 'destroys ancient Iraq statues in Mosul'", February 26, 2015).

This is part of our university heritage, and the destruction is symbolic of the wider tragic conflict in the region.

Dr Donna Yates is a specialist in Latin American archaeology. She is also a member of the Glasgow criminology team researching the movement of antiquities. She ventures to make a comment on the reporting of Syrian antiquities and is critical of yesterday's stories in The Times and The Washington Post.
But she goes further. She tweeted to the two newspapers her "doubts" that archaeological material from Syria is "coming to the UK". And she continues, "I say there's no proof".

Can we ask if this is a 'hunch' from Clydeside? Or has Dr Yates been round various London galleries to look? What is the basis of her 'authoritative' claim?

Paid Washington lobbyist Peter Tompa has decided to criticise investigative reporting of antiquities from Syria by the BBC. He conveniently overlooks the way that the BBC team met key people in the region, viewed material that had been seized coming out of Syria, talked to those handling the material, consulted with a range of non-academics and academics who are informed about the situation and the market, and trudged round galleries in London. The BBC File on 4 team uncovered some uncomfortable truths about the lack of rigour in the due diligence process for the antiquities market in Europe. For Tompa and Chris Maupin this is all 'sensationalist'.

Does Tompa have an 'axe to grind'? Does he receive payments for lobbying for clients who handle ancient material?

The Statuette was reported stolen from the Oliveriano Archeological Museum in Pesaro, Italy, in January 1964 along with several other items, including ivory tablets of the 9th and 13th centuries, early Christian glass artifacts from the Catacombs of Rome, and Italic and Roman statuettes. After its theft from the museum, the Statuette passed through several hands, and was eventually discovered by Italian and U.S. authorities when it was offered for sale by an auction house in Manhattan. After being provided with evidence that the Statuette was the same piece stolen from the museum, the consignor agreed to the FBI’s seizure of the Statuette for repatriation to Italy. The United States Attorney’s Office submitted a proposed stipulation and order providing for the Statuette’s seizure and return, and the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York entered that order on October 2, 2014.

It would be interesting to learn the full collecting history between 1964 and 2014.

Cox interviewed archaeologist Dr Assaad Seif in Lebanon. Seif noted that the Lebanese authorities had seized a number of antiquities coming out of Syria; among them were a dozen items each worth an estimated $1 million.

Yet Maupin seems to overlook this part of the report:

This despite the fact that in his investigation Cox only once sees any antiquities described as having been looted. These he views via a Skype meeting and are described as small figurines, glass vessels, bits of pottery and coins, acquired over a period of several months.

Maupin also suggests that the movement of antiquities from their find-spots to the market place is "imaginary".

Cox falls into the trap of reporting on an (imaginary) international criminal network, operating in a shadow world of diggers, smugglers, middlemen and dealers.

Cox, and producer Paul Grant, put together a carefully researched programme that explained how objects moved from Syria. Members of the programme team even attended a conference on Syria that was held at the British Academy so that they could hear the latest information.

Those of us in the UK value the professionalism of BBC journalists: rarely a day goes by at work without some discussion of a news piece on the BBC Today programme.

Maupin's post is itself 'sensationalist' and could be described as 'ill-informed'.

Is there another reason why Maupin want to discredit the BBC? Is he wanting to ensure the continuing movement of archaeological material from the Middle East to potential buyers?

Friday, February 20, 2015

My article on the so-called Crosby Garrett helmet that appeared in the Journal of Art Crime is now available on academia.edu. This documents the varying accounts of the discovery, reporting, 'restoration', sale, and display.

Abstract
Several million dollars’ worth of Egyptian antiquities are sold on the market every year. The majority of these items seem to
have surfaced for the first time since 1973, the date of the Archaeological Institute of America’s ‘Resolution of the
Acquisition of Antiquities by Museums’. Some of the material appearing on the market appears to have been removed from
archaeological stores in Egypt. There is also clear evidence that reliefs and other items are being removed from recorded tombs.
Many other items, such as the Akhmim stelae, come from previously unknown sites, and their removal has led to a loss of
knowledge about the original contexts. The scandals surrounding the return of antiquities to Italy has resulted in more
rigorous acquisition policies being developed by North American museums. This is likely to suppress the market for Egyptian
objects that do not have recorded collecting histories.

Wednesday, February 18, 2015

Alice Philipson and David Harrison have followed up the Gianfranco Becchina story ("British museums linked to Sicilian ‘loot dealer’", Sunday Times 8 February 2015). They have named one UK university museum (that had already been named by Italian journalist Fabio Isman) and suggest that further investigations are taking place in North America and Spain (presumably Madrid).

I am quoted in the report noting that a range of international museums had purchased from Becchina. The UK Museums Association was quoted and urged UK museum to checked their "provenances" (i.e. their collecting histories) carefully.

Dioskouroi featuring in the Schinoussa Archive and on display in New York MMA

New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art has been displaying a pair of Roman statues (on loan since 2008). The reported (but unauthenticated) collecting history attempts to place the pieces in a Mithraeum at Sidon with their discovery in the 19th century. However the paperwork seized in Basel (see here), Switzerland places them in Syria. Is this another case of 'adjusted' findspots?

It is important to stress that these statues were not removed during the present conflict.

A parallel discussion needs to take place around the Christian mosaics acquired by Fordham University.

Tuesday, February 17, 2015

BBC's File on Four investigative team have made a detailed exploration of the movement of looted antiquities from Syria to the markets of western Europe. They look at material that is on offer for sale in Beirut, and other objects that have been seized in Lebanon. The journalist asked specifically about Roman mosaics.

One of those interviewed spoke about the shift in volume of material moving out of Syria since the start of the recent conflict.

The BBC emphasised the need to verify information especially about the amounts of money highlighted from captured UCB sticks.

One of the UNESCO officials spoke of the need to dampen down the market as she expected some objects could be stored for some years. A middleman in Turkey talked about one object that had sold for $1.1 million.

Some material apparently from the region was spotted on the London market.

There was a discussion of the lack of regulation ("unacceptable") in the antiquities market in London.

BBC Radio 4's journalists have been investigating the movement of archaeological material from Syria to the antiquities markets in the west (Simon Cox, "The men who smuggle the loot that funds IS", BBC News Magazine 17 February 2015). The results will be broadcast later today on Radio 4 ("Islamic State: Looting for Terror"). The programme has talked to an individual who moves objects across the border of Syria into Lebanon. He claims some of the items have sold for $1 million. They then talk to a middleman in southern Turkey who passes material onto the western dealers. Material includes a large Byzantine coin hoard. The team talked to a dealer in Beirut who offered to arrange the shipment of mosaics to London. Museum officials in the Lebanon raise the issue of fakes being produced to flood the market.

The programme also talks to Vernon Rapley who suggests that material from London is for sale in London.

It appears that a police officer apprehended an individual searching the Castle Green by torchlight at Plympton St Maurice in Devon. The site is recorded by English Heritage as follows "This garden or other land is registered under the Historic Buildings and Ancient Monuments Act 1953 within the Register of Historic Parks and Gardens by English Heritage for its special historic interest."

Is there a need to renew the debate about the need to protect heritage sites in England?

I am grateful to Paul Barford for drawing my attention to the incident.

Friday, February 13, 2015

It appears that illegal metal detecting has been taking place along the line of Hadrian's Wall in Northumberland (Tony Henderson, "Heritage crime concern on Hadrian's Wall because of illegal digging", Chronicle 10 February 2015). The hunting has taken place in the central section of the wall to the west of the well-preserved fort at Housesteads.

This is discussed in the wider context of 'Heritage Crime'.

Mark Harrison, English Heritage national crime advisor said: “The practice of nighthawking, particularly from such important sites as Hadrian’s Wall, is an issue that we take very seriously.

“We recognise that the majority of the metal detecting community comply with the laws and regulations relating to the discovery and recovery of objects from the land, but just as it is against the law to break into someone’s house and steal their possessions, so it is illegal to damage land and steal valuable historical artefacts.

“The objects they are stealing belong to the landowner, in this case the National Trust, and the history they are stealing belongs to all of us.”

Quarrying along the line of the wall in the 1920s and 1930s brought about a major shift in the attitude towards heritage monuments in their wider setting (see here). This deliberate damage to a world heritage monument should renew the discussion of how the finite archaeological record is being damaged in a quite deliberate way.

Elsewhere Harrison has called for 'research, debate and ultimately influence [to drive] the changes necessary to protect and preserve the world's cultural and historic environment'. How will Harrison and English Heritage seek to influence the necessary changes to protect our universal heritage?

Some of the issues were raised in the forum piece for the Papers of the Institute of Archaeology.

I noticed that The Times (London has covered the Lenborough Hoard (Jack Malvern, "Metal-detector row led to £1m Anglo Saxon coin hoard", 11 February 2015). Much of the story recycles the British Museum press release but it includes a section on Paul Barford, an "archaeological blogger". The Times draws attention to the information that has been lost by the scooping of the coins into a carrier bag.

Wednesday, February 11, 2015

BBC Radio 4's "File on Four" will be covering the topic of looted antiquities from Syria and Northern Iraq its programme next week (and also available on the BBC World Service). It will investigate claims about the value of the material surfacing on the market as well as the routes used to get items onto the western markets.

We should also note that Dr Roger Bland has suggested that the future of PAS is far from certain.

However, the head of the antiquities scheme that funds the finds, Roger Bland, said the future was looking uncertain because of budget reductions.

"I'm not sure whether we're going to be able to renew the contracts for nine of the 32 posts that we've got in the scheme from the 1 April.

"I'm quite concerned but I also feel that we've been in difficult places before and we've managed to keep going," he said.

Meanwhile Dr Daniel Pett of PAS has tweeted me a message.

@davidwjgill your post stating that there was an error with the PAS site is incorrect. You were searching our backup server (no images.)
— Daniel Pett (@portableant) February 11, 2015

This was no doubt in reaction to my post yesterday. My search arrived at a page so that when you clicked on the link you just saw code - and the image was one of Lego. I can only presume that the BM has set up their backup server so that the public (and search engines) can see it. Perhaps that is a loophole that should be closed.

... the largest Anglo Saxon coin hoard found since the Treasure Act began is announced. This amazing archaeological hoard of around 5,200 coins was discovered in the village of Lenborough, Buckinghamshire. This discovery highlights the ongoing importance of the Portable Antiquities Scheme and Treasure Act in ensuring that the most important finds are secured for the nation.

Neil MacGregor also comments on the hoard:

More Treasure finds are being reported than ever before and unique objects are documented and conserved for study and public display, such as the recent find of the largest Anglo-Saxon coin hoard recorded since the Treasure Act of 1996. These achievements are a testament to the network of Finds Liaison Officers, who play a key role in ensuring archaeological finds found by the public are properly reported and recorded.

Is the Lenborough Hoard the best example to use of how FLOs are deployed in the field? Could some of the issues that arose have been anticipated by the FLO? Are archaeologists just interested in recording objects and creating databases? What about the careful excavation of coin hoards that we have seen elsewhere?

The finder Paul Coleman is also quoted in the press release:

'When I saw the first few coins I was really excited because I knew I had found a hoard, however the excitement grew and grew as the size and importance of the find became apparent. Ros Tyrrell, the FLO who was in charge of the excavation, was spot on when she said "now I know a little of what Egyptologist Howard Carter must have felt, when he first looked into the tomb of Tutankhamen."'

What is meant by 'excavation' here? Did Carter scoop up the Tutankhamun finds into a handy F&M pannier? (No doubt an informed reader of LM will have studied the packing materials of the excavation.)

Mr Vaizey said: “I’d especially like to thank the finders and landowners who have graciously waived their right to a reward so that local museums can acquire treasure.

“It is an initiative that the government has been keen to support and it demonstrates that metal detectorists have a genuine interest in the past, and are not just interested in archaeology for personal gain.”

The coins are being showcased at the British Museum this morning with curator, Gareth Williams, discussing his research into the hoard but the eventual resting place of the coins is yet to be decided.

It is pity that the apparent rushed removal of the coins will have meant that valuable contextual knowledge was lost.

I have commented on the Lenborough Hoard before. Current Archaeology has a short account of the "discovery" in its March 2015 edition ("Unearthing the Lenborough Hoard", p.9) and the entry is partially posted on the PAS website (I suggest you visit to see the error message that I am sure will disappear shortly after this post goes up).

The CA report tells is, 'Attending metal-detecting events in order to ensure finds are properly recorded and their precise locations logged is all in a day's work for a Finds Liaison Officer'. So does that mean that the precise relationship of the coins one to another was retained? After all, the BM has published the model way to excavate and remove a coin hoard.

Earlier reports had suggested that the coins were found in a 'lead bucket' but Ros Tyrrell (FLO) is now quoted: 'The coins had been piled onto a thin rectangle of lead sheet, after which the longer edges were folded over on themselves, and the ends pinched together to make an elliptical parcel'. The parcel now appears as part of the description on the PAS database.

The report informs us that the coins 'do not seem to have been arranged in any particular order'. I presume that this is an observation made from the carefully controlled removal of the coins.

The PAS database states that Gareth Williams is preparing a report for the Coroner while the CA story states that 'a full archaeological report' is in preparation for the Coroner's inquest. What will it contain?

I am sure that there are lessons to be derived from the removal of the hoard.

Monday, February 9, 2015

I am sure that many readers of LM will have been taking an interest in the collecting histories of some of the recently surfacing (or should that be emerging?) papyri in North American collections. Those of us who take an academic interest in these matters do have a genuine interest in 'the truth behind' what is going on. So the emergence and disappearance of links to 'the truth' (in fact a rather dismissive attempt at what some could interpret as 'humor' [which is apparently not the same as 'humour' in the UK]) raise more questions than provide answers.

Paul Barford has captured the essence of the now lost YouTube video (perhaps now known as VTruth).

I have been working on some recently surfaced material. And as I sat discussing the objects with a colleague it reminded me of some key issues.

Archaeological contexts provide information about dates, associations, place of use etc. Such information does not 'reside' in the object if it is plucked --- one could use the word 'hoiked' --- from its context in an unscientific manner.

So a database of decontextualised archaeological odds and ends is not the same as a detailed archaeological report.

I wonder if one of the issues is that some museum curators do not understand the importance of archaeological contexts. They can attempt to understand the object by searching for parallels --- and how many people have read Kevin Butcher's excellent "Land of Parallél" in the Archaeological Review from Cambridge? --- but are unable to "give" the lost information back to the object.

I will be exploring this tension between "archaeological material" and "museum objects" in my lecture at UCL next week.

Wednesday, February 4, 2015

The public handover of antiquities linked Gianfranco Becchina and seized in Basel raise major issues over objects identified from Becchina's dossier of images. Among them is an Attic black-figured column-krater attributed to the Bucci painter. The Becchina dossier suggests that they had been handled by the dealer Mario Bruno of Lugano.

Bruno appears in The Medici Conspiracy (p. 154): '[one of two] competitors in trafficking archaeological material from Italy, both busy trying to buy the best objects that came to light'.

I have noted this krater before when it passed through Christie's in 2013 (for $37,500) as part of the dispersal of the Kluge collection. The present owner of the Bucci painter's krater is unstated.

Monday, February 2, 2015

There are ongoing discussions about the surfacing of new papyri on the market. I have posted my review of Craig A. Evans, Jesus and the Ossuaries (2003) on academia.edu as it touches on related points.

FEEDJIT Recommended Reading

Feedback

Some Recommended Books

About Me

David Gill is Professor of Archaeological Heritage and Director of Heritage Futures at the University of Suffolk. He was a Rome Scholar at the British School at Rome and a Sir James Knott Fellow at the University of Newcastle upon Tyne. He was subsequently part of the Department of Antiquities at the Fitzwilliam Museum, University of Cambridge, and Reader in Mediterranean Archaeology, Swansea University. He holds the Archaeological Institute of America's Outstanding Public Service Award (2012).